You've made it clear by this statement that you haven't watched any of Malkin's EL games, and thus are making judgement off of one play that you saw in an Olympic game. If I'm wrong, please post the game and time of another "Bertuzzi Psycho move" that Malkin displayed. Maybe your squirt team should be a bit concerned if this is an example of your recognition of talent.

Scott wrote: Just what we need.

I agree. Someone who is willing to battle in front of the net and stick up for himself is what the Penguins need. Well said, Scott.

Scott wrote: it is not about camparing the result of Bertuzzi's action,,it is in fact comparing a what if.

The replay clearly shows Lecavalier skating away from Malkin, and Malkin comes up from behind and clearly kicks towards his face, with the intent to injure Lecavalier. Oh, wait? What? Lecavalier pulled him down first? And they were battling in front of the net? Hmm. Yeah, that's probably still the same thing as sucker punching someone from behind and driving their face into the ice.

This Bertuzzi comparison is laughable at best, regardless of your argument about the 'result of the action.' Give me a break.

Steve Moore probably disagrees that the situations were similar.

UUUMMMM....lol, if he ever makes it to the NHL was an exaggeration on them ever getting an agreement in place for him to come over. Has nothing to do with talent. He is amazing on the ice.

As far as the Bertuzzi thing...please read a little more into it than that. It has nothing to do with the aftermath....it does have to do with the fact of kicking with your blade. The incident is over, and nothing happened, sadly unlike the Bertuzzi incident.

The POINT...is that any kind of thought to kick with your blade is SICK. Pure and simple.
Was the Bertuzzi reference a bad example? Yes since people are reading it as a broken neck to nothing happening. Again, not about what didnt happen, but what could have and the fact that he had the notion to kick with his blade. Period.

Once again, if you're going to make these "psycho" claims, please simply post game date and time of the other horrible Malkin incidents, and I'll go watch to see if I agree.

Enough with the aftermath arguments, I mentioned nothing of aftermath. If you'll read again, I talked only about what happened beforehand. Even if there was a kicking motion made, I hardly think that by the position of the players you can say that there was intent to injure. If you had someone pushing on you as you tried to stand up, I would think the natural reaction would be to do what you had to to get them to stop, whether you're wearing skates, baseball spikes, or your high heels. His leg kicked out. I don't think Lecavalier felt his career was in danger.

I'll say once again, I'm happy to have someone on my team that is willing to battle and stick up for himself.

Scott wrote:Again, not about what didnt happen, but what could have and the fact that he had the notion to kick with his blade. Period.

This is where I think you are losing people. As many here have said, there was no definite kicking motion. The fact that the Canadien media have not said anything about this tells me that it wasn't as bad as Lecavalier and the referees made it out to be.

I can't say I saw what happened. I was in class and missed it. However, based on what I have read -- both here and elsewhere -- there was a scrum in front of the net, Lecavalier pulled Malkin down, Malkin pushed down on him and moved his leg in an unusual manner. Lecavalier got up and made a kicking motion, as if to put a thought into the referees' heads.

To me, it seems blown out of proportion. IF he did make a kicking motion, then I'll agree that that is an irresponsible action and he needs to get rid of that mentality quickly. However, based on his history and the fact that there has been no Canadien backlash, I find this hard to believe.

Again, I can't comment on the specics, as I didn't see any of it...so the above was just my take based on what I have read.

Where were you when Colten Orr kicked Crosby? How about when Talbot made a kicking motion during a fight? Neither one of those guys was given even a minor penalty and I know they seen Talbots! I did'nt see what Malkin did so I am not going to judge him but if your this upset over a kicking motion where were you then?

Ahhhh nevermind.

I do have a seriious question for you however. At what age should players learn how to check and play with contact? Just curious what your thoughts are as a coach.

NIN wrote:I do have a seriious question for you however. At what age should players learn how to check and play with contact? Just curious what your thoughts are as a coach.

There was an interesting study recently released in Canada comparing Quebec and Ontario for player injury rates. Quebec starts checking 2 years later than Ontario and they had significantly lower injury rates in all age groups. I'm sure this isn't a scientifically valid survey because there are differences in style of play and other variables, but it does look like the axiom that players learning to hit earlier makes them more likely to be safer with hitting as they age is a fallacy.

I think checking should be allowed starting at 14 or so. How to use your body for leverage, etc in the corners can be taught much earlier than that, which will also start toughening up players. Their bodies aren't ready for the hip and shoulder abuse that checking causes until they're at least 14 or 15 though.

Draftnik, I skimmed that study as well and what I took away from it was that the 9 year olds were getting hurt throughout their careers alot more than those who learned at 14. Certainly that is surprising if its accurate. I would think that the more accustomed to doing something the better you would be.

There are 2 things that support that result (again I appoligise if I misinterpreted the info):

1. Kids bounce back from bumps and bruises quickly but there could be underlying bone damage that they might sort of grow into as they mature. Or perhaps damage at an early age causes a structural flaw that is easily reinjured as they get hit at older ages.

2. They are taught too early and therefore at a much slower speed. THis could make their instincts slower. I know that is reaching but in the heat of battle a fraction of a second is the difference and a 14+ year olds covers alot more ice than a 9 year old. Those old instructions and subsiquent reactions are slower as a result.

NIN wrote:Draftnik, I skimmed that study as well and what I took away from it was that the 9 year olds were getting hurt throughout their careers alot more than those who learned at 14. Certainly that is surprising if its accurate. I would think that the more accustomed to doing something you are the better you would be.

There are 2 things that support that result (again I appoligise if I misinterpreted the info):

1. Kids bounce back from bumps and bruises quickly but there could be underlying bone damage that they might sort of grow into as they mature. Or perhaps damage at an early age causes a structural flaw that is easily reinjured as they get hit at older ages.

2. They are taught too early and therefore at a much slower speed. THis could make their instincts slower. I know that is reaching but in the heat of battle a fraction of a second is the difference and a 14+ year olds covers alot more ice than a 9 year old. Those old instructions and subsiquent reactions are slower as a result.

I've never coached young kids so I really don't know much about teaching them to hit. The extent of my "coaching" is some advance scouting for a friend that coached HS & club teams in the area, so I really never thought about this issue until I saw the report.

TSN had a feature when the study was released that showed Ontario kids going for monster hits that really had nothing to do with the flow of the play. They weren't open ice hits as much as pile driving opponents into the boards. That conclusion came off a few sequences of hits and was only anecdotal, but I see no reason kids should hit before 14. I think it is unnecessary at that age and distracts kids from developing skills.

I love to see great hitting (World JRs are 1,000,000 times better than the Olympics because of the tempo and physicality), but IMO it is superflous to the objective of young kids having fun and developing their skills.

NIN wrote:Where were you when Colten Orr kicked Crosby? How about when Talbot made a kicking motion during a fight? Neither one of those guys was given even a minor penalty and I know they seen Talbots! I did'nt see what Malkin did so I am not going to judge him but if your this upset over a kicking motion where were you then?

Ahhhh nevermind.

I do have a seriious question for you however. At what age should players learn how to check and play with contact? Just curious what your thoughts are as a coach.

NIN that is impossible to answer. There are too many things to factor aside from just an ideal age being set for starting to check.

First and foremost the biggest thing to teach any kid is the structure of the game. I do not buy into the Canadian study of injuries later on from checking too soon. (Pop Warner football goes full contact in many places at the ripe age of 7. Has for many years. )

There are many parts in this country, heck even in some of this state, that the object right now for many of those places is to get kids on the ice, period. ! If you introduced checking too soon at those places then you may risk losing kid participation. This could result in a loss of youth hockey for say that small community and rink.

Skating is the key.
If you have a lot of exceptional skaters, then they can learn the game at a faster rate than novice skaters. This would be fine to introduce checking at an early age as you can teach proper postioning, and timing etc. In that case, 8 wouldnt be too young to start introducing a check.
That certainly is the exception.

As most places, atleast in this country, a lot of kids dont start playing until 8, 9, or 10. To have them start checking that young just starting out would result in bad hockey, or worse yet, them quitting.
In this and most situations, I stand by the USA HOCKEY sanctioning body of 12 years old.

Don't forget, just becasue there is no checking does not mean there is not contact. There are incidental collisions that rival any hard check all the time. 99 percent of the time, they dont get hurt.

It is not the injury thing, it is the function and overall structure of the game that needs to be taught first!

[quote="Draftnik"]TSN showed the replay tonight with a spot shadow. Lecavalier was pushing down on Malkin as he was getting up off his prone body. Malkin raised his leg to try and get Lecavalier off him and as a reaction to Lecavalier pushing down on his leg/hip. He was reacting to Lecavalier's display of poor sportsmanship. It is never appropriate to push down on your opponent as a player is getting up off the ice, court, field, etc. Malkin was wrong for doing it, but it hardly was a malicious act.quote]

Thing I don't understand is this. If Malkin used the kicking motion to get someone off of him, where is the issue?

Daniel wrote:Thing I don't understand is this. If Malkin used the kicking motion to get someone off of him, where is the issue?

Exactly.

Boy was Scotty quick to answer to NIN, eh?

NINner credited with an assist for deflection of the flame war.

For someone who can't even follow what people post...not just me, but you do this all the time...YOU DO IT AGAIN. lol...
NIN asked a question, I answered it. Simple as that. No assist for deflection needed.

I will let you go back to falsely comprehending what people post on here.

Daniel wrote:Thing I don't understand is this. If Malkin used the kicking motion to get someone off of him, where is the issue?

Exactly.

Boy was Scotty quick to answer to NIN, eh?

NINner credited with an assist for deflection of the flame war.

For someone who can't even follow what people post...not just me, but you do this all the time...YOU DO IT AGAIN. lol...NIN asked a question, I answered it. Simple as that. No assist for deflection needed.

I will let you go back to falsely comprehending what people post on here.

Your right Scott. In fact I rather enjoy the heated debates. I was just curious. NOw excuse me I found a "severed organ" in my breakfast borrito and I must go vomit now.

Hello every body, i saw the Malkin mistake but he is young and the end of the game was hard with a lot of pression, but we mustn't forget is beautifull JO he had 2goal and 4assits in 6 games (sorry for my english but i'm a french's PENS fan)

I understood perfectly what you meant. I also explained that in my last post and asked you to clarify and justify your statements. Just waiting for responses to my questions Scott. Thanks.

I'll lay out my questions for you again, for the 3rd time. This way I don't get accused of not reading your post. Again.

# 1. Please post the game and time of all the other 'psycho' moves that Malin has made so that I can go back and watch them. I'd like to see all the other Betuzzi-like actions so that I can make judgement for myself.

# 2. I agree that the outcome to the Bertuzzi situation is not what is being discussed. I have said this several times. However, it is what led up to the actions that is so different. Bertuzzi sucker punched a defenseless player. Malkin was defending himself in a scrum in front of the goal. If he tried to stand and can't a natural reaction is to use his leg the way he did. Besides that fact, if he has the grit to get in a battle in front of the goal and then stick up for himself, great for him. If we could get 3/4 of the current Pens to do that, we'd be in much better shape.

Last edited by Vanbiesbrouck on Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:24 am, edited 2 times in total.

Scott wrote:I will let you go back to falsely comprehending what people post on here.

I don't think many people misunderstood your post - most of the criticism I read was that you jumped all over Malkin without seeing exactly what happened and compared that incident to the Bertuzzi-Moore thing.

I know kicking is one of the worst things you can do on a hcokey rink. It is extremely dangeroud. He got punished for it and no one has an issue with that. It was also the first time he's been involved in anything remotely close to that. By all accounts, he is a very good kid, captain-type material.

For anyone blast him the way you did (especially without even seeing what happened) is crazy. The tone of that post (which I know can be very hard to judge) also made it sound like you had not only judged him on this one incident, but believed it to be a defining point of his character and that he is and always will be an idiot based on 2 seconds of his life.

That's why others jumped on you the way they did. I really don't think it had anything to do with comprehension.

alain blanc wrote:Hello every body, i saw the Malkin mistake but he is young and the end of the game was hard with a lot of pression, but we mustn't forget is beautifull JO he had 2goal and 4assits in 6 games (sorry for my english but i'm a french's PENS fan)

Welcome Alain! Don't worry about your english... you doing just fine.

Malkin *is* an awesome player, he'll be a great additon to the Pens (Hopefully next year). What he did was a minor offense. Scott dosn't seem to understand the difference betwen kicking and kneeing (If what he did *was* even an intentional kneeing), of course in Scott's defense, the Olympic commitee paid officals doing the game didn't seem to recognize the difference either.

In any case, bring up Bertuzzi / Moore was totally uneccessary and inane.
It only served to weaken Scotts point. Of course it did illict a large number of posts on this rather large thread (Which was probably Scotts intent in the first place).